Please quatnify that statement.
I think you should maybe look into how the EU works a little more, mate
The team who proposes the laws is called the european commission and is made of 28 people.
They are comprised of 1 president who is proposed the european council (mainly heads of states) and the european parliament majority give the approval. The rest of the commissioners are then selected by the president who in turn select the rest of the commissioner 1 from each country with normally the head of each country providing a recommendation.
Now we have our undemocratically voted commission that has been elected by essentially the heads of the states and hand picked team who then propose and discuss new laws and regulations. These get put to the european parliament where your MEP will vote yes or no for it. If no, the commission might make a new amendment or what not but at no point does your elected MEP get an input into what goes in or out of the bill.
So how does this differ from the peoples republic party in china, whereby the politburo and actual leadership is selected by the party. There is no this party will do this and we all vote a party, it is just a group of heads selecting who they want without any input from the common person.
@moreinjuredthanowen as for Turkey never joining the EU, Cameron in 2010 and 2014 was backing Turkey to join the EU (he may have changed his stance since, well since the referendum started)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-10773007
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...-Turkey-to-join-EU-despite-migrant-fears.html
Right someone answer me this...
The gross is 350m a week.
Then rebate.
Then money back in funding.
So we pay approx 100M in that never returns....a week
1) what does the 150m or so in funding coming back actually go on? No one's been talking about whether it goes to the right places. It may well do but I have seen the split and what it's for?
**** bananas etc...It doesn't go on fishing subsidies because almost all the remaining (very few) fishermen support remain. The policy has been hand written for the Spanish. Hence why being one of the few countries to obey the rules we got screwed.
The Agricultural funding is a bit different...because of the supermarkets farmers rely on the EU funding to survive: but over here anyway; they feel trapped by it. The funding limits what they can do with their land as it's geared to French agriculture. They're on a lose lose....
2) Do we believe 100M a week is worth the supposed free trade? If so, tell me how. Tell me in numbers how it would cost more a week with trade costs outside.
actually its more 150m but whatever just chump change really for free trade
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35943216
1 last thing about the EU... i guess mine is scaremongering but do you think after we vote in for the EU, the EU is going to remain as it is or will it again expand its power. Now if we were talking about Europe being as one where there was parties we nominated and we had a breakdown in national barriers, that might be more appetising but we aren't, there are too many differences culturally and financially. If it was a common trading area, again that is fine, but that is not what it is anymore.
Next on the list maybe an EU army: only our EU president. This is probably a good thing for the UK though, we'd probably be providing a lot of the arms. Then again we'd probably be paying for part of the army in our contributions
You must log in or register to see media